MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402911973 · doi:10.1167/jov.24.10.292

Spatial Attention Appears Modulated by Behaviourally Relevant Contexts

2024· article· en· W4402911973 on OpenAlexaff
Noah Britt, Jiali Song, Jackie Chau, Hong‐Jin Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitive psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well-documented that visual spatial attention can be modulated by the visual features of objects in the environment if the features contain semantic information, especially when behaviourally relevant (e.g., emotional facial expressions). The current study demonstrated that observers could prioritize attention toward specific object features when, and only when, the object becomes relevant within a certain behaviourally relevant context. In the current study, using virtual 3-D technology, we presented to licensed drivers a modified cue-target paradigm where a peripheral cylinder cue was followed by a peripheral roadside pedestrian target. Participants discriminated the hand/arm position of the pedestrian with a button-press on a steering wheel. The pedestrian target could appear on the same or different side of the road as the cue. In addition, pedestrians could appear oriented toward the road or away from the road—but this feature remained irrelevant to the participants’ responses. Through three experiments, we consistently found that, in the 3-D experimental condition where participants ‘drive’ within a virtual simulation, the cueing effect was significantly larger when pedestrians were facing towards the road compared to away from the road. This revealed enhanced attention towards targets—specifically those facing the road—in the cued location while driving. In contrast, this sensitivity for pedestrian orientation was not present in the three control conditions: 1) 3-D Stationary (non-driving), 2) 2-D Stationary (non-driving), and 3) another 3-D Driving scenario with an inanimate light-post target. These results suggest that drivers have heightened attention to pedestrians facing the road even though the pedestrian orientation was task-irrelevant. Licensed drivers likely demonstrated a preparatory mechanism to prioritize attention toward an event that may indicate a probability of impending collision. This novel phenomenon may be unique only to over-learned tasks such as driving (even simulated). These findings present additional evidence in favour of an embodied account of attention.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207